Logic: Introductory vs. Traditional

[womenfly]

Can anyone offer a comparison of
Introductory Logic (Wilson and Nance)
vs.
Traditional Logic (Cothran)

We have completed two books of "Building Thinking Skills", but no formal Logic.
(for 7th grader next year)

Thanks!

[Suzybearybake]

We have used Introductory Logic, Intermediate Logic, and Traditional Logic 2. Do you have any specific questions about them? We used the programs with DVDs and my child did them pretty much independently. I hated Intermediate Logic .It was much less verbal and more reminiscent of geometric proofs. It spent alot of time converting proofs to symbols. My child enjoyed the video presentation of the Introductory Logic more than the Traditional. With child number two ,I will use Traditional 1 & 2 because
he will end up throughly frustrated by the Intermediate book.

Introductory Logic
Statements
Self-supporting statements
Supported statements
Relationships between statements
Consistency and disagreement
One basic verb
Categorical statements
Square of opposition
Contradiction
Contrariety
Subcontrairety
Subimplication
Superimplication
Syllogisms and Validity
Arguments
Truth and Validity
The Syllogism
Mood of syllogisms
Figure of syllogisms
Testing by counter example
Distributed terms
Testing by rules
Immediate inferences
Translating Ordinary Statements
Parameters and exclusives
Enthymemes
Hypothetical syllogisms
Fallacies ( Distraction, Ambiguity, Form)

Intermediate Logic
Purpose and type of definition
Genus and Species
Extension and Intension
Methods of defining
Rules
Propositional Logic
Negation, Conguation, and Disjunction
Truth Tables
Conditional
Biconditional
Truth tables ( 5 exercises)
Dilemma
Formal Proofs
Rules of inference
Rules of replacement
Conditional proofs
Reductio ad absurdum
Rules unnecessary
Truth-functional completeness
Truth Trees
TT consistency
TT Self Contradiction and tautology
Decomposition rules
TT Equivalence
TT Validity

Traditional 2
Figure in syllogisms
Mood
Reducing to 1st figure moods
Indirect reduction
Translating to logical statements
Enthymemes
Conditional Syllogisms
Disjunctive syllogisms
Conjunctive syllogisms
Pollysyllogisms and Aristotelian Sorites
Goclenian Sorites and Conditional Sorites
Epicheirema
Dilema
Oblique syllogism

[Amy in NH]

We did some Mind Benders followed by The Fallacy Detective. Then we tried to start Introductory Logic in 7th grade, but it was *way* too Christian for us. We are able to tolerate the Christian POV in the Traditional Logic series much better (although I can't see why we can't just have logic without the religion).

[Beth in Central TX]

Here's a review of both programs on the MP Forum that I found helpful: http://www.memoriapress.com/forum/showthread.php?t=406

[Charon]

I bought Nance almost entirely because of Cothran's bad attitude (http://www.memoriapress.com/articles/logicmath.html) about modern developments in logic. No, modern symbolic logic is not some sort of atheist conspiracy to make logic difficult nor is it just good for getting rid of philosophy or religion and replacing them with science. It is just progress. With that said though, I do not think that Cothran is the teaching textbooks of logic. (I am becoming famous for my disdain for that math program.) I really do appreciate where Cothran is coming from in his attitude, but I think he is just kind of wrong, unfortunately. (I am something of an anti-positivist, myself, and I'd like to think that I would know one if I saw one. If I do -- Cothran is definitely one. But, he is still wrong about math and logic.)

At any rate, you could do much much worse, I think than to use Cothran's program. I bought Nance but did also flip through Cothran. Personally, I didn't and don't do either. I am doing something even more mathematical (and probably harder and probably at the expense of other subjects) than either of these.

[Charon]

I bought Nance almost entirely because of Cothran's bad attitude (http://www.memoriapress.com/articles/logicmath.html) about modern developments in logic. No, modern symbolic logic is not some sort of atheist conspiracy to make logic difficult nor is it just good for getting rid of philosophy or religion and replacing them with science. It is just progress. With that said though, I do not think that Cothran is the teaching textbooks of logic. (I am becoming famous for my disdain for that math program.) I really do appreciate where Cothran is coming from in his attitude, but I think he is just kind of wrong, unfortunately. (I am something of an anti-positivist, myself, and I'd like to think that I would know one if I saw one. If I do -- Cothran is definitely one. But, he is still wrong about math and logic.)

At any rate, you could do much much worse, I think than to use Cothran's program. I bought Nance but did also flip through Cothran. Personally, I didn't and don't do either. I am doing something even more mathematical (and probably harder and probably at the expense of other subjects) than either of these.

nt = no text

[ChrisN in NY]

I've been thinking about this recently myself, for dd for the fall, and appreciate all the advice, etc. that's been given. It's very helpful to me!

[Mama Lynx]

We did some Mind Benders followed by The Fallacy Detective. Then we tried to start Introductory Logic in 7th grade, but it was *way* too Christian for us. We are able to tolerate the Christian POV in the Traditional Logic series much better (although I can't see why we can't just have logic without the religion).

Would you expand on this? In what way was IL too Christian, and why is the Christianity in TL more tolerable?

[womenfly]

Wow. Thanks for the replies. I am experiencing one of those realities -> it goes something like this:
I knew that I didn't know much about this topic (hence, my very general first question) - now I am quite certain that I know WAY LESS than I even knew was possible not to know. good grief.
Guess I have some research to do.

Any input on use of either of these philosophies (traditional vs. modern logic) in terms of college education - OR - in terms of future reality for a left-brained / strategically-oriented / engineering-type 12 y.o. male mind?

I know, I know - I promised to do some research before asking more uneducated questions ... here I go ...

[FloridaLisa]

If you'll search the old high school boards for posts by Tina in Ouray about logic, you will have a wonderful headstart in your research. She's written quite a few long responses to logic questions over the last year(s).

HTH,
Lisa

[Maverick]

I can't help with the comparison, but both my boys have completed traditional Logic I and are in about lesson 5 of Trad. Logic II. They are both doing very well (it is a co-op class so I am not teaching it myself) but my 12 yo "left-brained / strategically-oriented / engineering-type" absolutely loves it. He says he is going to be the next Aristotle and write books about philosophy that people will read in thousands of years. :001_smile: He asked me the other day if there is another logic book he can study when he finishes TL 2.

[Amy in NH]

:001_smile: He asked me the other day if there is another logic book he can study when he finishes TL 2.

Material Logic? That's what we will do after we finish TL 2.


Would you expand on this? In what way was IL too Christian, and why is the Christianity in TL more tolerable?

There are two types of religious curricula. My take on adapting Christian texts to our Secular purpose is that we come at them with the understanding that there are some pretty large assumptions being made that are a part of the foundation of the ideas the author is trying to get across. All religious traditions have their kernels of wisdom and truth, so I try to pick them out and discuss their meaning when we are using any overtly religious curriculum. Other times my son may want to talk about why he disagrees with a certain argument because he disagrees with the underlying assumptions. The other kind of text just *doesn't work* because the thought processes are so grounded in doctrine that we can't gain an understanding of the subject matter at hand (logic, in this case) by following their ideas!

My recollection is that IL was more like that last case, while TL just uses some religious examples to help reinforce the lesson and is thus more adaptable.

[Mama Lynx]

Thank you. I've been considering TL. We are also secular in our school, so knowing that IL is so grounded in doctrine, but TL is easier to manage, is a huge help.